ML19329G165

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Bechtel Response to Item of Noncompliance Noted in QA Program Insp Rept 99900521/80-01.Corrective Action Initiated,However Part 21 Evaluation Not Conducted.Requests Comments
ML19329G165
Person / Time
Issue date: 04/30/1980
From: Potapovs U
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To: Reinmuth G
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
Shared Package
ML19329G158 List:
References
REF-QA-99900521 NUDOCS 8007140063
Download: ML19329G165 (1)


Text

,

. M -N,,\\

UNITE D OT t,1 T :.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p.: '.f 7

R E GION IV sJ -

=. i ;; t 7,

611 RY AN PL AZA DRIVE. SUITE 1000 ARLINGTON, TE x AS 76012 g'8

v. ' e

.S ',A 1

%, =...../

3 0 APF 1930 MEMORANDUM FOR:

G. W. Reinmuth, AD, DRCI, Hqs.

FROM:

Uldis Potapovs, Chief, VIB, RIV

SUBJECT:

GUIDANCE REGARDING PART 21 CITATION - BECHTEL, LA Attached is a copy of the Bechtel-Los Angeles response to an infraction identified in our inspection report No. 99900521/80-01.

Bechtel does not believe Part 21 applies since.the defects were detected before the systems were delivered to the customer for acceptance.

-Briefly, Bechtel audits identified design defects on drawings issued for construction.

Corrective action was initiated, however, no Part 21 evaluation was made since construction had not delivered the systems to the customer for acceptance although a 50.55(e) report was issued by the utility.

It is our view that Bechtel engineering's completion of their design, and issuance of the drawings for construction use, constituted delivery of the item, thus making applicable the evaluation and reporting requirements of Part 21.

As further interest and possible bearing on your assessment, Bechtel has both i

the design and construction scope for this project and both activities are in-cluded in a single contract with the customer.

We are requesting guidance relative to the appropriateness and accuracy of our finding.

We would appreciate a timely response to this request so we may complete our efforts concerning this specific finding and so we may be better prepared if a'similar problem is encountered during our other inspections.

~

v Lk f b

[

  • 7 t

Uldis Potapovs, Chief Vendor Inspection Branch l

Attachment:

as stated cc:

R.'H. Brickley, RIV.

C. J. Hale, RIV 80 0 71400(of

_